↓ Skip to main content

Rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial of directly observed hepatitis C treatment delivered in methadone clinics

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial of directly observed hepatitis C treatment delivered in methadone clinics
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-11-315
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alain H Litwin, Karina M Berg, Xuan Li, Jennifer Hidalgo, Julia H Arnsten

Abstract

Most methadone-maintained injection drug users (IDUs) have been infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV), but few initiate HCV treatment. Physicians may be reluctant to treat HCV in IDUs because of concerns about treatment adherence, psychiatric comorbidity, or ongoing drug use. Optimal HCV management approaches for IDUs remain unknown. We are conducting a randomized controlled trial in a network of nine methadone clinics with onsite HCV care to determine whether modified directly observed therapy (mDOT), compared to treatment as usual (TAU), improves adherence and virologic outcomes among opioid users.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 12%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 6 7%
Other 20 22%
Unknown 26 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Psychology 5 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 24 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 November 2011.
All research outputs
#15,260,577
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,747
of 8,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,087
of 157,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#39
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 157,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.